Phoenix Range Test Results, September 15, 2012

[TonyWilliams]

I expressed the criticism that, in my opinion, the message your team concluded from the test data was fudged, skewed, and exaggerated.

We disagree. End of message.

"did nothing to help," but rather "actually worked to interfere with these positive outcomes," and thus... "you know who you are, and so do we."

Nothing to do with you. I don't consider you much of a player either way in these issues. I regret making that statement in general, as there is nothing positive to be gained. End of message.

You did a truly admirable job orchestrating the AZ owners' tests and gathering the data, at great personal sacrifice, no question. But if you cannot recognize that there is a difference between your tit and my tat, I don't know what to tell you.

Thank you. Stop telling me anything would be fine. End of message.

Maybe I am the only kid in this playground who sees it that way. Could be. But regardless of the numerous mistakes I continue to make in life, I spent far too many years questioning if there was something "wrong" with me, and I refuse to lie down and let a bully kick me in my self-esteem anymore.

Clearly, I find the reverse. When I responded, you thought yourself the saint for enlightening us with your prose and careful insight, and I saw a bully who didn't even know the most basic facts.

So, we disagree. I didnt beat you up with my response this time, so no worries there. I won't be responding in the future, so nothing to worry yourself about there, either. Best wishes in your EV endeavors. I will relegate you and a few other perpetual pains in my posterior in the appropriate enemy/foe list for our mutual satisfaction using this forum. End of message and end of the back and forth.

 

[DaveEV]

MOD NOTE: Come on guys, keep it civil and quit the whining and personal attacks. Is there really any need to announce to the world that someone has entered your foe list? Just do it if you feel the need and spare the rest of us your drama and help keep these threads on topic.

 

[Stoaty]

Thanks for putting this together.

I think the most useful addition would be month of manufacture and date of delivery, if you have that for most or all of the tests cars.

I realize this would be a lot of data to present on a single chart, but I would find it much easier to compare data from the three charts, if the cars were listed in the same order, on all three, if that's not too much trouble.

Good ideas. I am thinking of combining the data into one or two tables (but probably not this weekend). I have to see all the info on one page first to figure out how to edit it. I hope that this will be useful for those who haven't followed all of the 350 posts in the range test thread and don't have the time/energy to wade through it. There are still a few more things I want to add; I am about half way through the range test thread searching for the most pertinent information.

 

[edatoakrun]

Thanks for putting this together.

I think the most useful addition would be month of manufacture and date of delivery, if you have that for most or all of the tests cars.

I realize this would be a lot of data to present on a single chart, but I would find it much easier to compare data from the three charts, if the cars were listed in the same order, on all three, if that's not too much trouble.

Good ideas. I am thinking of combining the data into one or two tables (but probably not this weekend). I have to see all the info on one page first to figure out how to edit it. I hope that this will be useful for those who haven't followed all of the 350 posts in the range test thread and don't have the time/energy to wade through it. There are still a few more things I want to add; I am about half way through the range test thread searching for the most pertinent information.

If you're looking for even more work, and it is not violating the confidentiality (?) of the test car owners/lessees, a way to correlate the test cars to their status on the capacity bar loser lists (such as identifying as "first bar loss list #XX") would also be very informative, IMO.

 

[surfingslovak]

OK, I think I found the control car we've been quarreling about. It was done at about 80 F and 65 mph per dash. Mkjayakumar's car was about a month old at the time. No Gid reading is available. Location was Plano, TX.

http://bit.ly/65mphleaftx

 

[scottf200]

MOD NOTE: ...Is there really any need to announce to the world that someone has entered your foe list?

I think it can be useful to let that person (and others) know because that person could be writting post directly/indirectly at you and assume you are reading them. Once they know they often cut down their "directed" post. Until they cut them down others may be wondering why you are not responding to thier direct/indirect post. I have witnessed this.

 

[Stoaty]

OK, I think I found the control car we've been quarreling about. It was done at about 80 F and 65 mph per dash. Mkjayakumar's car was about a month old at the time. No Gid reading is available. Location was Plano, TX.

http://bit.ly/65mphleaftx

Excellent find. I added this reference to the range testing section in the Wiki. Also added graphs for Percent Capacity vs Total Miles Driven (correlation coefficient -0.73) and Percent Apparent Capacity vs Total Miles Driven (correlation coefficient -0.64). The correlation coefficients are better for capacity vs Percent Gids.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Repost from:

mkjayakumar

Post subject: Re: Miles per KWH at highway speeds (65 mph)Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:36 pm

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 9:13 am
Posts: 402
Location: Plano, TX (DFW area)
Delivery Date: 08 Mar 2012

Here is a result of my next test at the same speed but for a longer duration.

- 70 miles traveled at exactly 65 mph, at an impressive 4.2 miles/KWH.. Note: I reset the miles/kwh in the dash only after getting into the freeway and reaching a steady state of 65 mph. And this 4.2 was when I pulled out of the freeway just before the off-ramp.

- LBW at 76 miles with 8 miles left in the GoM. I then pulled out of the freeway into city streets. This means if I had continued driving at the same speed (65mph) and I would have seen VLB at 83 miles.


Questions:

- While the range pretty much matches with Tony chart, the miles/kwh I got was much higher. How is that possible ?

- If the 4.2 miles/Kwh was indeed the efficiency, then assuming a conservative 21KWH usable capacity, I should have got a range of 90 miles with sustained speed of 65 mph. But in reality, If I had continued driving at 65mph, I would have got no more than 83 miles. Where did the 7 miles go? battery capacity degradation ?

 

[EdmondLeaf]

OK, I think I found the control car we've been quarreling about. It was done at about 80 F and 65 mph per dash. Mkjayakumar's car was about a month old at the time. No Gid reading is available. Location was Plano, TX.

http://bit.ly/65mphleaftx

Excellent find. I added this reference to the range testing section in the Wiki. Also added graphs for Percent Capacity vs Total Miles Driven (correlation coefficient -0.73) and Percent Apparent Capacity vs Total Miles Driven (correlation coefficient -0.64). The correlation coefficients are better for capacity vs Percent Gids.

mkjayakumar car was sitting unslod from Aug '11 till Feb "12 in Dallas so is possible that there was a bit of degradation, if I remember exactly his GID count was about 265 when performed later, but not sure if that was June or July

 

[TonyWilliams]

- LBW at 76 miles with 8 miles left in the GoM. I then pulled out of the freeway into city streets. This means if I had continued driving at the same speed (65mph) and I would have seen VLB at 83 miles.

He would have added at least 13 miles from LBW, making an 89 mile run. As predicted, it would beat the 84 miles at 64/65 mph indicated, given the likely battery temperature then and air density. I'll look up the weather data for that date. Everything below is from April 10, 2012: if he drove the day before, the battery would have been slightly cooler and air slightly denser. The data below is comparable to the data from our Sept 15, 2012 Phoenix data.

Just to be clear, either April 9 or 10, 2012 conditions were LESS favorable to meet or exceed 84 miles than our Phoenix conditions. That means the air is slightly more dense, and the battery temperature is likely the same or cooler.

Elevation 480 feet / -- meters
Air Temperature 80 deg F / -- deg C
Altimeter Setting 30.08inches Hg / -- hPa
Dew Point 60 deg F / -- deg C


Density Altitude 1984 feet / 605 meters
Absolute Pressure 29.562 inches Hg / 1001.1 hPa
Air Density 0.0721 lb/ft3 / 1.155 kg/m3
Relative Density 94.32 %


April 10, 2012, Dallas, Texas:
9:53 AM 71.1 °F - 62.1 °F 73% 30.10 in 10.0 mi Calm Calm - N/A Mostly Cloudy
10:53 AM 75.0 °F - 61.0 °F 62% 30.11 in 10.0 mi WSW 6.9 mph - N/A Scattered Clouds
11:53 AM 78.1 °F - 60.1 °F 54% 30.11 in 10.0 mi West 8.1 mph - N/A Scattered Clouds
12:53 PM 80.1 °F 80.9 °F 60.1 °F 50% 30.10 in 10.0 mi West 6.9 mph - N/A Partly Cloudy
1:53 PM 82.0 °F 83.0 °F 62.1 °F 51% 30.07 in 10.0 mi Calm Calm - N/A Partly Cloudy
2:53 PM 82.9 °F 83.2 °F 60.1 °F 46% 30.05 in 10.0 mi Calm Calm - N/A Scattered Clouds
3:53 PM 82.9 °F 82.8 °F 59.0 °F 44% 30.03 in 10.0 mi SSW 5.8 mph - N/A Scattered Clouds
4:53 PM 82.9 °F 82.4 °F 57.0 °F 41% 30.01 in 10.0 mi WSW 6.9 mph - N/A Mostly Cloudy
5:53 PM 82.0 °F 82.1 °F 59.0 °F 45% 30.01 in 10.0 mi WSW 5.8 mph - N/A Mostly Cloudy
6:53 PM 81.0 °F 81.6 °F 60.1 °F 49% 30.01 in 10.0 mi SSW 5.8 mph - N/A Mostly Cloudy
7:53 PM 79.0 °F - 60.1 °F 52% 30.01 in 10.0 mi SSW 5.8 mph - N/A Mostly Cloudy
8:53 PM 75.9 °F - 61.0 °F 60% 30.02 in 10.0 mi South 9.2 mph - N/A Scattered Clouds
9:53 PM 75.2 °F - 62.6 °F 65% 30.05 in 10.0 mi South 5.8 mph - N/A Scattered Clouds

 

[ericsf]

Personally, I think a better more "repeatable" test could be concocted without driving by using the procedure Nissan outlines in the service manual:

If this is done in similar ambient temps it should be way more repeatable than driving.

If in addition to this, we instrumented the test, it would be extremely accurate. I was thinking about a small portable device that connects to the service plug port and has a calibrated kelvin-connected lab-grade current shunt. This could accurately measure real coulombs in/out of the battery and eliminate any inaccuracies the LBC may be introducing.

But even without any add-on instruments, just a setting a stopwatch until the battery contactor opens would be very revealing.

-Phil

I would pay for a real independant diagnostic of my car's battery. No gigs, no miles. Just kWh.

 

[surfingslovak]

He would have added at least 13 miles from LBW, making an 89 mile run. As predicted, it would beat the 84 miles at 64/65 mph indicated, given the likely battery temperature then and air density. I'll look up the weather data for that date. Everything below is from April 10, 2012: if he drove the day before, the battery would have been slightly cooler and air slightly denser. The data below is comparable to the data from our Sept 15, 2012 Phoenix data.

Just to be clear, either April 9 or 10, 2012 conditions were LESS favorable to meet or exceed 84 miles than our Phoenix conditions. That means the air is slightly more dense, and the battery temperature is likely the same or cooler.

Elevation 480 feet / -- meters
Air Temperature 80 deg F / -- deg C
Altimeter Setting 30.08inches Hg / -- hPa
Dew Point 60 deg F / -- deg C

Great to see all this data, and the Gid count too (thanks Richards). Jay confirmed the weather conditions in his follow-up post in the same thread. I think the temps were very close:

Of course, I am very impressed and very encouraged by what I saw today. Perfect conditions though. 80F with no wind.

Click to open

 

[WetEV]

The first Wiki draft summarizing the Arizona range test results is here:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Battery_Capacity_Loss#Range_Test_on_Cars_with_Battery_Capacity_Loss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have done some calculations/graphing that I hope will make the relationships between the data clearer.

As always, feel free to offer comments, criticisms, corrections (or make the changes yourself).

Thank you.

 

[Stanton]

OK, I think I found the control car we've been quarreling about. It was done at about 80 F and 65 mph per dash. Mkjayakumar's car was about a month old at the time. No Gid reading is available. Location was Plano, TX.

http://bit.ly/65mphleaftx

Excellent find. I added this reference to the range testing section in the Wiki. Also added graphs for Percent Capacity vs Total Miles Driven (correlation coefficient -0.73) and Percent Apparent Capacity vs Total Miles Driven (correlation coefficient -0.64). The correlation coefficients are better for capacity vs Percent Gids.

mkjayakumar car was sitting unslod from Aug '11 till Feb "12 in Dallas so is possible that there was a bit of degradation, if I remember exactly his GID count was about 265 when performed later, but not sure if that was June or July

Glad you pointed that out...and I believe that GID count was taken in May, because he did it with the same meter that I had borrowed. You may want to confirm that GID count with him, because IIRC we both measured around 260 GIDs (our cars were manufactured around the same time, but I took possession of mine immediately where his car sat on the dealer's lot for 6 months).

 

[cwerdna]

I haven't been able to follow this thread closely for a few days due to trip (and driving to/from) LA. Was someone in Phoenix w/a relatively new control car able to run a range test over the same route?

Obviously, that would be a very interesting data point along with its GID count.

 

[Stoaty]

I haven't been able to follow this thread closely for a few days due to trip (and driving to/from) LA. Was someone in Phoenix w/a relatively new control car able to run a range test over the same route?

No, but surfingslovak found an excellent test that should be a very good proxy. See end of the first paragraph. Remember, the Wiki is your friend

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Battery_Capacity_Loss#Range_Test_on_Cars_with_Battery_Capacity_Loss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[Stoaty]

The second Wiki draft summarizing the Arizona range test results is here:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Battery_Capacity_Loss#Range_Test_on_Cars_with_Battery_Capacity_Loss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have combined the three tables into one table, and edited out some of the material I decided was extraneous after studying a bit more.

As always, feel free to offer comments, criticisms, corrections (or make the changes yourself).

 

[mkjayakumar]

Stanton / Tony,

I measured the GIDs on Jun 03, and it came out to 262 at 100% full charge. Please see http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=5582&hilit=281&start=330#p202946

The test drive was done on April 10th. In the intervening two months I did charge to 100% a few times, and probably let it sit at a high SOC in my office parking lot because the commute one way to my office is only 4 miles. I didn't know better at that time. So i am guessing I should have had a few more GIDs in early April.

Jay Jayakumar

 

[Stoaty]

WetEV pointed out an error in the Wiki graph of Percent Capacity vs. Total Miles Driven:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Battery_Capacity_Loss#Range_Test_on_Cars_with_Battery_Capacity_Loss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Apparently the total mileage for the last 3 entries in the table didn't get properly updated when I corrected the Percent Capacity for Blue534. Graph has been fixed. Linear regression now shows a stronger correlation coefficient (-0.85 instead of -0.73) and a loss of capacity of 7.5% (instead of 6.5%) for every 10,000 miles driven.

Thanks for checking on my work!

 

[Cheezmo]

Stanton / Tony,

I measured the GIDs on Jun 03, and it came out to 262 at 100% full charge. Please see http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=5582&hilit=281&start=330#p202946

The test drive was done on April 10th. In the intervening two months I did charge to 100% a few times, and probably let it sit at a high SOC in my office parking lot because the commute one way to my office is only 4 miles. I didn't know better at that time. So i am guessing I should have had a few more GIDs in early April.

Jay Jayakumar

Did you measure the gids several times over several days? Remember when I borrowed that same meter, my first measurement was sub 270, but over the next couple of days each reading crept higher until I got 274 or so I believe.